chemicals and everyday things? a few yrs ago i was reading "the new york times" and i stumed on an article about new work by the centersor disease control and prevention in atlanta. it was a short article and it sa t cdc was tracking traces of chemical pollutants including some chemicals ud in everyday thin in the blood and of a representative sample of the population. these kinds of measurements are called biomonitoring. until i heard about biomonitoring thought of pollution as and externals i affecting the environment but withhe cdc was rorting and tracking, these chemical poutants ipeople brought home for me the concept of our body share the burden of pollution to mexico at the same tame the information get that through biomonitoring raised important questions that thought i might be able to addresses the journast. should we be concerned about the effects of pollutants on our health? n everyday items be responsible forhe chemicals inside us?
don't regulators already make sure we are safe from daily doseof hazardous substances? i started digging in brann soon discovered some things that really stunnede and here is how i began toell the sry of what i found. the turnf to the tiny hamlet of bolinas is the mark from california highway bonus entwistle long pacic ocean havilland's one hour north of san francisco. everytime highly crispin that this kind pointing to bolinas the locals take it dow a building moratorium enacted in 1971 preserves vale as much as it was during its counterculture heyday a colony of 1560 artists, writer healers and active as intent on safeguarding their bohemian community from commercial encroachment. while ny subdivisionshat nearby beach, bolinas is still affected whenichard nixon was in the white house in bill clinton inhale. downtown los the grocery store with more free rae dodd
littering outside the patron xiaoping inside, a restaurant serves the freshest ingredients from nearby farms and a gas station with the bed and breakfast above it. victorian houses andottages room the lagoon. hibben for pelicans added that stuff for migratory birds navigating in the pacific flyway. ng cost of gone up in bolinas but local sensibilities in the pristine landscapes have stayed the same. 20 years ago sharyle patton discovered the town. i used to come to bolinas and play music that patton a pianist and singer that study that the berkley college of music in boston. that led to playing bluegrass msen's for a living. she let met her husba in plas because he founded and directs commonweal think-tank in cancer healing center that occupies the former rc transmission site overlooking the pacific and bolinas with the couple liv. approaching the age of 60 patton has the trim build the inspirited glow of the one who pays attention to diet and
exercise. it is easy to eat organic and bolinas says that now takes the bench of miles of aches out sider durrant hiking trails that crisscross this this in the natial seashore. she was raised on a colorado rancher like to be outdoors. the bungalow she shares with her husband came with a spectacar garden. pat none choice tending the legacy adding color and texture to the garden ery year. she is always taking good care of yourself avoiding the pitfal of drugs, booze and the back of the pl gutters of regeneration especially fellow musicians and it sws. shiastan strayed which makes her look taller than her feet 8 inches, a short coffle of blonde hair frames blue eyes that twinkle in a slightly lopsided smile. pad nist please the energy of the womenave ra as an activist on issues of health and the informant. as the leader of a network of 350 non-governmental organizations from around the
worlpatton helped gde the u. persistent organic looms gemming which calls for the elimination of a dirty dozen list of chemical contaminants considered among the world's most hazardous. intellectually she understands as well as anyone ubiquitous nature of chemical pollutants but she didn't expect the emotional jolt she felt when she learned her body was polluted with traces of 105 chemicals linkedn animal studies to a st of devastating health effects including cancer, disruption of the hormo system birth deformities in neurological impairment. i don't live next door to a refinery or incinerator or some kind of factory said at his blood was screened for chemical pollants after she volunteered for a study conducted by mount sinaschool of medicine in new york. i haveeen careful andt has demanded that a difference in terms of the chemicals and my bodq. it turns out that what it's in pat nelson eryone of us too. like our forebears everyone everywhere now carri a
dizzying of ray of chemical contaminants, the byproducts of modern industry and innovation. these toxic substances accumulate in arat, bones, blood and organs and pastor rosson milk, during, weat, hair and nls. fio studying pollutants in people including researchers call the phenomenon chemical body burden. it is the consequence of womb t tomb exposure to substances so common in our daily lives that weever stopp to consider them. that water repellent jackie were wearing got that way because of a chemical called pfoa. it is used to make the membranes need to import the extra utility. as of this writing thd environment protection agency which is asking manufacturers to voluntarily reduce emissions is debating whether to officially deribed a patnt---- thank you tyellow babb toy your
child loves to chew, it is likely to contai plasticizers known as phthalates which are part of a large family of industrial chemicals linked to inherent quality. vet t.d. you spend hours in front of isrobably made with thkneur tactic chemical flame retardant notice polybrominated diphenyl either. which is showing up in the milk at the .s. mothers and rea 100 times the avera found in european studies. in 2003 california followed the lead of european unn and became the first day today and the types of p other states have followed but th mostommonype of ppd in the one found in tee'd's is still in we use cause scientists areorried that they disrupt th developing thyroid systemnd could cause developmental deficits. it is overwhelming what were exposed to says jane houlihan, the berman to working group washington d.c.-based public advocacy organization that part
in several monitoring studies in an effort to rse awareness of c@emical body burden and the need for mor research. every day she said we get a fresh blush ofhemicals. no pla to no one is immune. the most persistent chemical contaminants are carried across oceans and continent by water and air, like grasshoppers they lift into thetmosphere in glide back to earth moving from the warmer climates to colder climates and settlinghousands of miles from the contamination source. they are fat soluble and they filed mad the fight increasing its concentration as they move up the food chain. baes receive their first exposure in the womb. in the united states are chemical neighborhood includes more than 80,000 industrial substances registered for commercial purposes but the epa all about 10,000f these chemicals are widely used in everything from clothing, carpeting, household cleaners and computerso furniture, food containers, paint, cookware and
cosmetics but the vast majority of them have not been tested for potential toxic effects bause the west toxic substances corol act of 1976 does not require it. the news get shockingly wor. the e.p. cannmt take any regulatory action regarding a suspected harmful substance until it has evidence that opposes unreasonable ris of injury to human health or e environment. the barriers to action are so high that accordingo a 2005 repo by the government countability office the epa had given up trying to regulate chemicals and instead relies on the chemical industry tact voluarily when concerns arborize brick of the stunning failures of not been rectified for more than three decades. and dispubly chemicals of rates are living standard amaker lives easier and safer a. think of the conveniences of plastic storage containers, personal computers and fast picking mike royce bekka they
give the security of fire resistive materials, stronger than steel bulletproof vests and nylon seatbelts. the can argue with the chemistry council a trade organization that bepresents dow, dupont and hundreds of chemical companies when it suggests in the advertising campaign that chemicals are essential to life. the slugged speaks volumes about the iortance of the 637 billion-dollar year u.s. instry. it is not the chemicals are bad per se and it would be preposterous for even the most ardent environmentalist to suggest such a notion. it is that costly societal problems often arise because we know so little about so many chemicals and in the time it takes to learn what harm the substance is doing to people, to animal, to places the jeanie as long out of the bottle. so, what it comes down to is this. the ited states does n have a viable means to keep its 300 million citizen saved from new found chemical hazards and
the things we use and by every single day. the result of this policy failure is chemicals not to interfere with the body's reproductive developmental and behavioral functions are fely used in everything from plastic to soaked sand toys to food wrappers, clothing and carpeting. children receive their first exposure to hazardous chemicals while they are developing inhe mb because the plan said that is no barrier. every child ces pre-loaded with chemicals that may be contributing to health problems that an't apparent until later in life. hundreds of peer reviews at ea of these d a krin disrupting chemicals which drew up the body's homone system and various ways and altered gene expression cause lab animals to exhibit disorders than sfunction better on the rise. the list includes cancers of the, membrane, lowered cous come early puberty and girls and in demetrius and other defects of the female reproductive sir-- diabetes the and attention
deficit order, asthma and autism for koessel going back to the cbc' biomonitoring wor the chemicals not on the contaminator air water and soil but they are also unsighted bustle glols that in some cases are uncomfortably close to the amount that cause harmful effects in lab animals. let me be very clear abouthis. my review of their research shows scientists have demonstrated their laborator work and animal studies it correlation between the human problems of just mentioned and exsure to substances of such things as polycarbonate plastic, greece resistant food wrapping, the by lotion and tv's. human studies are beginning to confirm what scientistthe in lab animals but this fine one cannot say there's a direct cause and effect. in my book i introduce you to scientists and plic health advocates around the world were looking at the animal findings and urging of limits on human exposure because of their serious concerns. these are brilliant young
scientists such as berkley professor tyrone hayes was hired by syngenta, the principal maker of atropine, to study their herbicide's effects on front. as i explained the chemical borrows from the playbook of big tobaccoo create public confusion and doubt of e findgsf researchers such as hayes. he discovered as little as one rt per billion of that asim i enough to sexually scramble frog in the u.s. it is okay to have three rts per billion of that is seen in drinking water. at shazeena is thend the european union, the corporate, syenta but it is widely used in the united states. the european unioand canada are taking the lead in exercising precautionary actio on chemicals. this is based on the connect the dots method of intifyi hazards bu this is not the case in the united states. here we have a system where the epa tries to manage chemicals to the toxic substances control act. this legislation as i mentioned
a moment agm was best way back in 1976 and the idea was to regulate the words chemicals before they got into the commercial pipeline buthis just hasn't happened. first, the legislation simply gave the greenight to the 62,000 chemicals already in commerce when the act was psed more than 30 years ago and second founew chemicals are concerned it didn't require manufacturers to test for toxicity or to measure exposure levels. said the epa relies on the scientific model to predict the toxicity of chemicals and the epa was put on a short leash from another perspective too. whatever action epa takes to restrict chemicals cannot create unneceary barriers to business. and that the last time the epa tried to regulate substance was back in 1989. this jetsons was asbestos. the epa restrictions were overturned by a federal appeals court because the epa had not met the test of riskenefit balancing in applying its
actions. the bottom line is the top six regulatis in the united states put company prophets before consumer protection at the expense of public health. evaluators from the national academy of sciences tohe general accountability office to the congressional office of technology assessment have weighed in on the inadequacies of the system but we are still stuck with that. as he evans rosen about the hazards of everyday things about the ldp can do is negotiate with the chemical and street when it suspects the checal of being a bad actor and here's what the story comes back to microwave popcorn. the inside of a microwave popcorn bag is coatewith a substance that as a byproductf production resulting in a chemial known as pfoa which stands for perfluorooctanoic acid. the coating is applied for eece protection so hacky pop the popcorn the oil comes to the back. pfoa and related chemicals that break down into it are used in the production of an enormous number of items for consumers.
they are used in making nonstick coating such as teflon, stain resistan applications for carpeting clothing and the work is t processing date for making waterproof breathable material such as gortex. th are used in plumber's tape, dental wallsten according to the marmix protection agency virtually every industry has applications for pfc's. pfc are interesti to toxicologist because they actually eye-popping characteristics. first of all they last forever and the environment a we discovered some resistance along with chemicals before and we have banned or restricted them for gallant that theersistent brigades pollutant trudi that sharyle patton quirked-- these are substances ch as pcb's, the electrical insulators that stopped manufacturing in the 1970's because they built up in the environment and can cause harmful health effects. b%s are still measured in the
impairment because there so slow to pick them and they are inur food. i know this first-hand because pcb's for preston in my blood when i had a screen for pollutants as part of my research. pf sepa that would suggest are a thing beyond pcb's because perfluorinated chemils never ever breajdown. every pound that is ever put to the irovement will be there forever and the people that belong half-life. it takes years and years for our body to riitself of pfc's assuming we ver have another posure. in reality were exposed to more pfc's their bodies can never get rid of. the let's step back a moment to gauge what scientists know about perfluorinated ahemicals. there inuman blood, milk in the umbilical cord blood. darren places you expecto find them like downstream from in manufacturing plant for these chemicals are made in places where you wouldn't like-- and ey are in the arctic because of the way the movgat.
there ubiquitous then what are we doing about it? after considering the rearch on pfoa the epa's science advisory panel recommended lifting pfoa as a likely cancer causing agent. epa receipt this recommendation in 2005. it is yet to actn it because it is still conducting a forl risk assessment on pfoa. asou remember from imam ofhe epa has settled success regulating chemicals so it has that the chemical industry to phase out production ofcie ofa by 2015. meanwhile the fda which oversees fo additives is oking at the siation because of how these chemicals are used in food wrappings. toxicologists are holding meetings tryingo figure out if that's anima studies now suggests, load this developmental exposures to the chemicals are mehow contributing to obesity. to preliminary epidemiological studies lind low birth weight and body matheny born sulow
levelc of pfc's and we are still being exposed to this the othe day. as i write my book with ipse researchers fnd ty make you thk carefully about nicki n next bagtt popcorn. micrrray cocan base ntain a higher level of coding tn the product in the extmelyot extremelyast. this may behy the concentration of chemicals migrating from the bs into the popcorn oil were hundreds of times higher than the amount of pcie ofa from heated nonstick cookware. based on the concentration measured by the scientists, consumption of ten banks o microwave pcorn a year could contribute about 20% of the average oa blood level. it is not the pts we should worry about, is the paper. there substces we need to be concerned about too i'm sure many of yohave heard about this venal a or bpa the building block of polycarbonate plastic used in spohrer water bottles and baby bottles the few
months ago candidate banned pocarbonate plastic baby bottles because of the hazards of this chemical and everyday exposure levels. nalgene and camelbak the makers of brand-name sport bottles have said they will no longer make their products using polycarbonate plastic for e makers ofisphenol a bottlers cannot produce them fast enough to fill the demd inanada, the united states and around the world and walrt and other major retailers said they will no longer sell certain polycarbonate plastic products. consumers clearly don't want epa in their products. as he may have purchased last month the fda came to a reassuring conclusion that this the analogy is perfectly safe as used. however the fda in its recent safety assessment and an earlier ones at that point mmi but rely on the findings from two studies that declare bisphenol a poses no problems. in its munch recent assecsment the fda can ash mcgill to
consider the behavior of this chemical at low levels of exposure for gun doing so it dismissed the concerns of the world's leading epa expts. last yr 38 of them published a consensus statement in a peer review journal called reproductive toxicology. in it they said that 95% of us have blood lels within the range predicted to be biologically active. not all of this bpa is coming from sport bottles and baby bottles. bpa is used in immaterial that nes must medal good chae. the researchers warn that the average defects they have seen in more than 150 lab studies are of great concern because of the potential for similarffects humans. these are problems that correspond with recent trends and human diseases. including increases in breast cancer and prostate cancer, it increased in abnormaties in male babies me a decline in the seaman quality of men, early onset puberty andls,
metabolic disorders leading to diabetes and obesity and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. let's say the experts are only half right. isn't it wiesen enough to get epa out of our products? e fda doesn't see it that way because the relied on the risk-based approach rher than one based on hazard identification. in other wds the fda is vetting the odds that epa is not a probl. in spite of what the experts say and in spite of a final determination by the federal national toxicology program. it has been working on hazard idtification on bpa for several months and just this morning thecame out with a comet their final determination that bpa is of some concern for effect on development of the gland and for behavioral effects in fetuses, infants and children. occasionally the realities about the hazards of endocrine disrupting, goals that there are
policymakers. this is the case recently about a family of chemica i read about in the body toxic called phthalates and they are extremel versatile. they are used in toys, baby products and lotions, coetics and personal-care products, frequence ciscom air fresheners, a medical tubing, pvc piping, pharmaceuticals and car parts. there ubiquitous in r daily environment and biomoniring steady cvette levels of exposure warrants concern. humans are exposed to the same multiple phthalates in mig shares of felt dolleck that have keene the defects in rats. in mayo ratta-- web brits phthalat contribute to the toxic effects of the reproductive system including birth defects and fertility and cancer and there are reasons t suspect as the ascendancy nematt might provide some clues about increases in human me reproductive abnormalities.
last month congress passed sweeping reform to e conser product safety act which included newtandards for ts. part of this legislation calls for a ban on six kinds of phthalates. president bush signed into law and it is a good start but it does not call for bannin phthalates in personal-care products, which is another exposure and as far as the fda's concern phthalates areust fine. the fda leg authority over smetics and pernal-care products is difrent from its authority over drugs and medical devices. cosetic and psonal-care ingredients are not subject to premarket approval and yet tas not authozed to substantiate safety and performance claims. they talk about mbo the fda oversees $1 trilli a year of the drug, mical devices and cosmetics butts own finance advisory panel has concluded it is suffering from serious deficiencies that put american lives at risk. here is one examp. iubmitted a freedom of
information act request to find data about the working the fda's office of cosmetics. this office overseethe sale of 11 billion personal-care products of the year and the united states and here's what found out. theffice says 30 employees in its budget $4 million. in portland, oregan brin they have the office controls 989 traffic signal says 40 employees and the budget of 2 million so we can see this federal watchdog office. before i wrap up and get your questions and want to tell you about one more family of chemicals were exposed to cure every day things. these of the flame retardants done is polybrominated diphenyl ethers. structurally ty are similar to pcb's which i mentioned were banned in the 1970's because of these pdd's which reintroduced in the 1970's are very persistent and they bioaccumulate and the increasing
conctration as the move up e food chain. pbde's been added to items such as drakes carpeti furniture upholstery and plastic casings of electronics researchers began taking nice of them in the 1990's when they saw ineases in human milk. thgood news is that typeset pdd e-pass putin straights carpeting and upholstered furniture were voluntary taken off the market i2004 because ofealth and exposure coerns but that is tempered by two facts. first most of us have furniture and carpet and other big-ticket items in our homes and offices that date back well before 2004 and second the most widely used polybrominated fme retarnt is stilln the market for application electronics. several states have moved to ban all p b e pause because better alternatives a available in your confine list of products free from p.d. p.e.%s by checking out resources online.
but in the meantime there preliminary work is suggestin pbde exposur contributing to an edemic of hyperyroidism and house cats like to double up to warelectronics and catholic ildren like to spend a lot of time onhe floor and have an abundance of behaviors that make them susceptible to ingesting dustin verrett loaded with pdd eat boss. the bottom line is they may be the pc e's of the 20th century and like the other cmicals were exposedo them every day. there are proposals before the state of california and the u.s. congress that would greatly impre the status quo with reect to how we use and manage toxic chemicals and everyday things. ese overhaulsould safeguard our children and our grandchildren from the error of our ways. that is the big picture of what about our personal choices? i would le to read you a few paragrap from my book about whap they two the face of this dilemma. it is called my list in beyond.
when it comes to toxic exposures , curtailing soldiers to hazardous chemicals and consumer product requires actn ombct shrugged shoulders and continue to bu and use the same things but smalldjustments in your own life unless kneur exposures d risks. i am. he gast with changes are you may to reduce the typesf chemical exposure she read about so i wanted to show my own list. karen no particular order is what i've done to light my chemical low. i by any orgic foods whenever ssible because there pesticide free a i see that google is way ahead of the game on that are ready. i swore off microwa popco. i did tell my plastic food coainers because they can leach hazardous substces when he did in the microwave so i use glass or ceramic containers instead. i canceled my contrt for
monthly but control inside and outside my home because it is not necessary and there ntoxic ways for me to deal with the past. i declined all optional thing protection trements for upholstery or floor coverings that merchants try t sell me. i use slow or no dfc pain fo home improvement project and i reaced my polycarbonate fl with the same bottle made fm aluminum. i beckham in this my home and office at least once a week which is side met more than i did before i wrote the book because du is loaded with the chemical pollutants that concern me. i bought anodize aluminum pots d pans when michael where or choppered ois retailers questiols about the things that buy. if they do know the answer i coact manufacturers. i read labels. sometimes they don't get me the entire picture but a least they can provide me. i talked to my friends and family about the changes i have made him why i have made them. i don't obsess about chemical
pollutants. make informed decisions based on my understanding of thhazards of pesticides pesticides and flame retarnt state detecto. when i know something contained suspt substances i asked myself can i find an alternative? the answer is usually has but in one case i decided the benefit of using a certain product o weighs the risk. i work in al old building where the latte runs from the tapper coke felt endesa make it any more palatable so the best way for me to get the copious amounts of water i need depredate to drink from a polycarbonate job perched atop a rented kool-aid in my office. if i was serving a child read a point of my life where is considering having a by at would opt for a water dedivery produc that-- put it this time in my life that is not the case. by sharing this with i do not mean to suggest that the can shot by way clear ohazardous substances. large-scale population level expore reductions w happen
only whe we eliminate the worst acting substances in favor of safer alternatives. to that in congress must reform the xic substces control act of prisons to demand proof of safety for manufacturers. the european union has done it and began to. what i lacking is the political will. in the 2008 dlection year we ve heard lot of l service about change. the presidential front-runners promise the domestic policies fromealth care reforms to the economic action plans to taxeq with over house. nomadical ocpies t oval fice or which party controls congress we must urge our leaders toive consumers the protecti from toxics we deserve and expect. as of this writing envmental and public health groups are working with cgressional staffers to linep new legislatn that would protect americans from hazardous chemicals and consumer products and encouraged the development of safe alternatives. it is actuallyalled the kids
say chemicals that. base demotte viard no felt these hazards and potential to impact future generations we cannot wait any longer. state and local governments have moved ahead with restrictions on individual substan even industry concedes that federal rules are les burdensome a the patchwork o restrictions tha theory by jurisdiction. most important in the second half of 2008 some time this winter or in early 2009 the cdc is releasing its next biomonitoring steffie which reports on u.s. populatio exposures to some 300 chemicals ich is twice a many as the 2005eport. the much anticipated scoreca build the case for what we alread know, we are the body tawbiq emeka no longer afford our ignorance. so thank you very much for your time and attention and i will do my best to answer any questions that you have.
>> hi, i was wondering if you ink, you worry about most chemicals. if we get rid of these five, then what? do you see this as a war that can be won in the future rd you ink it is going to be 100 years fo there are no toxic chemicals in the things that we use? >> that is a good question. i think that we can really make major improvements and their reactions like the kidafe chemical act and also the state of california in the closing days of their legislative session just last week passed the green chemistry initiative which kind of a stage version of the kids safe chemil lack. it is going to create a way for scientists within the state government to assess the toxicity of certain chemicals and it is also going to provide lo of incentives for the creation of alternatives substances that are inherently
benign. and it is doable. i feel that very cfident that we are dealing with problems that we created for that society began to create well before we were born. around world war ii is when so many of these substances were introduced for commercial applications. but as we go forward, i really do believe that we have an opportunity to do it differently and the united states is really lagging the rest of the world right now and reassessing and reconfiguring its approach to the chemicals used in management. >> hi, i have two questions. you know vinnie efforts to get flame retardants out of children's sleep were?
i spent over $100 getting to sleep sets shipped fro canada for my daughter and the other question i the carbon nan of tubes that act like asbestos in the bodyn if there is an effort to manage those? >> let me answer the second question first. nanotechnology is a fascinating area again were we areort of leing the geniout of the bole before we have any idea exactly what we are dealing with them exactly what to expect. i don't have any details about the carbon nanoparticle that you referred to, but if you go to a web site that is run by the, i think it is the epa but it is a federal agency, there is an office that is coordinating nanotechnology developments, and
it is a fascinating read because it is quite obvious that while this is a thrilling development with all sorts of potential applications, so little is known out what happens nnce we have applied this technology and all sorts of consumer products. as far as the flam retardants and sleepwear, ihink tt cfoia has taken some action on that very recently. it may not be quite in effect yet but i think, are you shakin your head no? id didden get sign, okay. well, i think vhat you wer dealing with is a great illustration of kind of the day-to-day problems and it sounds like you've had to edate yoursf, go out and try find the product that you fe washe safer alternative and you know it puts a huge burden on consumers to do all sorts of work and that is really
unfortunate it really should be the other way round i think. we should be at aoint where we can have some ssa that what is self there is save and it pleased that the hazards are something that are not acceptable to us. >> another question, have you heard of microwave therapy for removing toxins? >> i haven. removing toxins was not mething i gotnto in the book and tre are a lot of theories out there about different ways to do it, but it just wasn't something that i went to. maybe the next time. >> the one i heard about this you put yourself in a low grade microwave d supposedly i think there were scientific studies of but it and they do find more chemicals in your after the therapy, but i don't know if it is really not. >> as long as you areot wearing a gore-tex jacket, yeah.
i am sorry? [inaudible] okay. okay >> you talked about studies and comparisons between europe and the u.s. and canada and son. are you aware of studies i societies whereeople didn't have the meanso buy aot m this stuff, like in dublin and thempact of the incidence of cancer for instance? are you aware of those? >> what i talk about book is unfortunately becausef the way the mostersistent glutens buber around in t agreement and move around in aon fighter pare fehrman the places that ven't been exposed so it
almost like hean't find a clean sample, and yeah that is the an unfortunate effect that i don't think anybody anticipated when we started down this path. >> but presumably there is the difference with close contact with families like pltic ware and things like that force something that people, people don't have access to that. >> right, ieally couldn't answer that but it is very good question. >> i wanted to ask what is the relative hazards associated with these chemical issues, relative to say automobiles killing 40,000 year just in this country and how many people were affected by these chemicals and what is the impact relative to otr hazards? >> sur we' coee again we are at a point where research is indicating that there are correlatns between the increases in certain diseases and dysfunction.
one of the things, he just want to take a look at one particular chemical come up polybrominad diphenyl ethers some researchers are really concerned that there might be population level defects as a result of the use of these thines that decreases thyroid function and has an impact that shifts ally the way our society's, or the way that their population's pirates works do you end up with higher health costs, all sorts of problems relativ to the development that is associated with your thyroid and functioning associated with your thyroid and they are actually have been studies that have been done. it is not something that i detail in the book when the state of california was proposing the screen chemistry initiative, they did actual ght in great detail about what
they projected the cost vings wod be to society of embracing the green chemistry initiive an restricting some of the chemicals that i to write about versus continuing down the path at we are on. >> i think that about concludes hertog. does anyone have any more questions? thank you f, and nena will be availae to sign books after the talk. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> nena baker has been a reporter for united press international. she is currently licensed private investigator in portland oregon. for more information about this book visit dabashi tic.com.
pleaseet us know about book fairs and festils in your ariane and we will add them to ou list. e-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org. >> july 20th, 2009, marks the fortieth anniversary of the apollo 11 >> july 20, 2009 marks the 40th anniversary of the apollo 11 mission to the men. craig nelson talksbout the first moon landing in the people who accomplished it. th college park aviation museum in maryland hosted the event. it is 50 minutes. >> i'm so glad to be back in shington because it fiori a yes sir in coming to washington is like a dream come true. not only is it jake treen for going to the libraryf congress but it is a dream with a warm welcome you get when you come back when you come out of the caves of research in your book is actually on the shelves. so it is fantastic to be here. four years ago i realized the aplo 11 anniversary was coming
up a i grew up and used in the round the corner from the astronauts. i wasn eagle scout of the national jamboree in idaho when neal armstrong said hello to l us on the way to the men. and i thought i really want to read the book on apollo 11, the sort of big history book that tells you erythg about it and explains the signs that takes you behind the scenes that explains what happens afterward and i went out and although there are an incredible number of wonderful books and fantastic archive send really great magazine articles and things like that no one had really pulled all of this material together into oncoherent book, and i decided that is what i would do. a cple of years into doing this i went to kennedy space cent to e a shuttle launch from t samaunchpad that apollo 11 used in any of you who havet been, run. you hava got to see a launch a kennedy. is one of the most incredible things you will ever experience in your life. you get to see waves of
vibration hitting the ground comi toward you. used then ten seconds loong at the cloud appearing around the rocket thinking mething terrle has happened because you can't hear anything and all of a sudden this roar grietz ury gears because u are 3 miles away so there's a difference between what you se and what you hear. anyway while i was there was having a pretty rough time both with this book and it's my personal life and i was sort of wandering arounkennedy and i saw this strge little place here at kennedy an iaiwhat is that? they said that this launch complex 34. i said whats launch complex 34? they said that is where the apollo 1 fire happened with three astronauts lt their lives and w haveeft the ruins as a memorial t tm. when you go up closer to this yon see that they have a plaque and on this clack is little latin phrase that says, rough path leads